Gus Van Sant Quotes

If you are going to remake a film, you may as well remake a classic.

No, it's interesting to remake a film for the contemporary audience today. I think it's a good idea; it needs to respect the original idea. Don't just take the title and change everything else.

The truth is that we're not remaking Sam Peckinpah's 'Straw Dogs,' we're making 'Straw Dogs.' We're taking this story, and we're putting our own spin on it. The mere fact that I have James Marsden in it is an indication that it's a very different film than the one that had Dustin Hoffman in it.

When you're remaking a classic, you don't want it to lose steam.

It's 2009, things change. I'm a creature of habit, so in the beginning I wanted it to be as much like the original as possible, but that's not reality. And reality is, this is a new generation, and people want to see 'Witch Mountain' again.

We went into this with the utmost respect for the source material, but we recognized the need for change.

I am strictly against remaking a movie.

Shakespeare has been adapted by Akira Kurosawa. 'Dangerous Liaisons' has been adapted into a Chinese movie. 'Blood Simple', the Coen brothers movie, was adapted by Zhang Yimou.

I really liked 'Premam,' and when we decided to remake it, our intention was never to make a better film.

When doing a remake, you're on safer territory. You know you cannot go absolutely wrong. But how right it goes depends on various factors like casting and the way you adapt the film.

We all know that one can never recreate the magic of an original film.

I don't like to use the word 'remake', I think reinterpretation is a better word. It's just a matter of respecting the source, and then trying to make your own film, and trying not to be inhibited by being so beholden to every single thing... We respect the source, but we make changes to it.

To adapt a play into a movie, you have to change it.

I wish someone would redo 'Dune.'

'Nightmare on Elm Street' really lends itself to using new technologies. CGI would be a great way to exploit and embrace the dream sequences.

The horror movie will not go away. Look at the change in the Hollywood landscape as a signifier of its durability. At one point it was just one of many styles of films called 'product' that between, say, 1930 and 1970, the movie city ground out like sausages or hula hoops at a rate of four or five a week.

I was skeptical about doing Texas Chainsaw at first because it's such a cult classic. I'd seen some of the sequels and was not a fan of those.

I think I've only done one horror movie, Psycho III. That was a walk in the park compared to a romantic comedy.

I like the idea of taking a true classic written by a true genius and destroying it essentially! I like the idea of bringing it down to earth a bit - and even a bit lower than that.

An old thing becomes new if you detach it from what usually surrounds it.

I like the old, classic scary movies. I love 'Psycho,' 'The Sixth Sense,' and 'Poltergeist.'

I think the Chainsaw remake is very good and captures the spirit of the original film. It's true to the tone of the original, to the point that it's almost a companion piece.

Any time you change something classic or iconic, you're going to have some part of the fan base up in arms.

I have always wondered why the movie industry was so firmly persuaded that the original author could be of no possible help in the case of a remake or any other change in a work.

The challenge of a revival is how to bring something fresh. The reward is the opportunity to add different flourishes. You're dealing with different actors, designers and a different time.